Perfection Is The Enemy of Perfectly Adequate : Except It Isn’t
A critical analysis of narrative in ‘Better Call Saul’
‘Breaking Bad’ is one of the most critically acclaimed television programmes of our lifetime and perhaps of all time, according to many reputable TV critics. The same should be said, in my opinion, for ‘Better Call Saul’, a spinoff series from the same creators about Walter White’s crook of a Laywer, Saul Goodman, or ‘Jimmy McGill’ as he is known in the prequel series.
Vince Gilligan and Peter Gould, creators and writers of the show, have put copious amounts of detail into all aspects of the show’s narrative and this all begins with the characters. Stemming from work in ‘Breaking Bad’, there is an instant use of intertextuality from the opening scene and many throughout the series. The audience are expected to have watched the original show and therefore understand it from a cultural perspective, bringing an already established understanding of the characters before gaining an even deeper one. The whole show is a backstory, it is focused around further character development as well as bringing new ones into the formula.
Like Breaking Bad, Better Call Saul uses focalisation to put the audience in the shoes of different characters. Jimmy might be the main character, but the narrative that ultimately leads to the events shown in Breaking Bad is pieced together by many connecting stories. We see the story unfold from the perspective of Jimmy, Mike, Gustavo, Nacho and many other side characters, some of which are one offs. These often take place in the present tense, however there are instances when characters will quite literally pull up a chair and tell an anecdote in the past tense.
A good example of this is when Gustavo Fring speaks to Hector Salamanca in the hospital about when he was a child of poverty, living in Chile. His story about maiming, but not killing, an animal that ate fruit from his only source of extra food is told from his perspective. The story of course foreshadows his relationship with Hector, whom he keeps alive in a semi-vegetative state for his own pleasure. Hearing this story from the character’s perspective indirectly furthers the story but also tells us something about the character and the kinds of man he really is.
It’s no surprise that the show’s use of mimesis, that is, to act out a scene rather than use narration, also blurs the lines between that and diegesis. An example of this is when Jimmy is narrating what he is doing when surveying the Los Pollos Hermanos chicken restaurant for Mike when it soon transpires that he is in fact speaking to Mike. The sound of the conversation is non-diegetic to the scene yet it is diegetic with the world we are seeing. There isn’t even an L-cut to give this context. We must wait for this to be revealed by Mike’s voice.
Setting as a location in Better Call Saul is referred to in dialogue through the character’s cultural understanding of Albuquerque, New Mexico with reference to district names.
As an audience, an international one, you are required to go with it when you don’t know these references and this is good in terms of immersing you in the narrative. Why should a character stop and spoon feed you everything? You wouldn’t tell your friend exactly where in the world your hometown is every time you mention it. As TV is visual, you are able to remind yourself of the setting through the show’s mise-en-scène. You are constantly reminded of the location through New Mexico’s topography. The sandy desert, the shapes and architecture of the buildings and not least the accents of the people living there. References to Mexico and Chile are seen throughout which emphasises how close the location is to the Mexican Border and therefore its culture.
Mise-en-scène is not only important for emphasising setting, but also for generating a sense of movement. Below is a frame from the episode “Alpine Shepherd Boy”.
The Alpine Shepherd Boy is a small figurine best described as “tat”. This innocent little figurine is an important prop in the series. It represents Jimmy’s transition from an honest attorney practicing elder law to a twisted crook.
Peirce’s triadic understanding of the sign springs to mind with this prop. The sign being The Alpine Shepherd Boy, the known object being Mrs Strauss and the interpretant being Jimmy’s morals. This would be an index relationship in Peirce’s theory since Mrs Strauss is associated with the object. She brought out a caring side in Jimmy and he was saddened over her eventual death despite being seemingly neutral after his own brother’s death. When Jimmy discovers the figurine’s pairing model is worth thousands of dollars, his instinct is to steal it from another character and sell it for personal gain; Almost like a devil to his angel, representing the two sides of his morality.
Movement is a key element of a good narrative. How does a story progress and what conflicts and emotions are we exposed to as an audience? A common criticism of Better Call Saul is that it is boring in comparison to Breaking Bad because of its slower pacing. I agree that the pacing is slower, but the only reason this is frustrating at times is because we have to wait a week between each episode and over a year between each season. If you had watched Breaking Bad from it’s first air date, I believe the feeling would be the same. Slower pacing is what makes Better Call Saul stand out in its own right. Temporality is employed differently and that’s a good thing. This includes the order in which events are told and how much time is devoted to a certain event in relation to how many realtime minutes it would take to unfold. For example, a court hearing that would take approximately half an hour can be reduced to four minutes in show, like with one of the series’ first scenes.
In contrast, the episode ‘Chicanery’ devotes the majority of its hour-long time slot to Jimmy’s Bar Association hearing. Seeing this from Jimmy’s human mental temporality and his perspective, emphasises the importance of this part of the story which is ultimately paramount to his career struggle and conflict with his more successful brother whom he resents. This will later motivate Jimmy’s character arc. It’s interesting to see a significant portion of the show’s airtime in realtime. It creates a good sense of immersion and gives the audience the opportunity to really feel as though they are the protagonist in a usually fast-moving world.
Saul / Jimmy is given a plethora of one-liners over his on-screen time. One that sticks with me is “Perfection Is The Enemy of Perfectly Adequate”. There’s a sense of irony in this for me since Better Call Saul is a media product that has been developed far beyond perfectly adequate. You just need to scratch below the surface and reveal all its hidden messages. There’s a reason the panel on “The Wright Stuff” didn’t like it. It is up to the viewer to put hours of viewing in to gain the rewards and joys it can bring.
